REPORT No. 72/17
CASE 13.019
REPORT ON MERITS
EDUARDO RICO
ARGENTINA
JULY 5, 2017
I.
SUMMARY
1.
On March 4, 2002, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter also “the
IACHR,” “the Commission,” or “the Inter-American Commission”) received a petition lodged by Susana María
Barneix and Adrián Leopoldo Azzi (hereinafter "the petitioners ") on behalf of Eduardo Rico, alleging the
violation by the Republic of Argentina (hereinafter also “Argentina,” “the State,” or “the Argentine State”) of
rights enshrined in the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter also “the American Convention”
or “the Convention”).1
2.
The petitioners said that in 1999, the alleged victim was subjected to a proceeding before an
impeachment jury (Jurado de Enjuiciamiento), a political body that in 2000 decided to dismiss him as a Judge
on the Sixth Labor Tribunal of San Isidro Judicial Department and declare him ineligible for any other post in
the judiciary for supposedly having committed disciplinary infractions. They said that various due process
violations were committed in the course of that proceeding and that he was denied the possibility of lodging
an appeal.
3.
The State said that the alleged victim underwent impeachment proceedings before an
impeachment jury which decided to remove him from office as a judge. It added that the proceedings
conformed to all domestic and international human rights standards, including the obligation to observe all
fair-trial guarantees.
4.
After analyzing the position of the parties, the Inter-American Commission concluded that
the Argentine State was responsible for the violation of the rights enshrined in Articles 8.1, 8.2(h), 9, 23, and
25 of the American Convention, taken in conjunction with the obligations established in Articles 1(1) and 2 of
the same instrument, to the detriment of Eduardo Rico. The Commission also concluded that the State was
not responsible for violation of the right to a hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal, or
for violation of the right of defense.
II.
PROCESSING SUBSEQUENT TO THE ADMISSIBILITY REPORT
5.
The IACHR received the petition on March 4, 2002, and registered it as No. 149-02. The
processing of the petition up to the decision on admissibility, is described in detail in Report on Admissibility
9/16 of April 13, 2016.2 In that report the IACHR declared the petition admissible for the purposes of
examining possible violations of rights recognized in Articles 8, 9, and 25 of the American Convention in
connection with Articles 1(1) and 2 of that instrument.3
6.
The Commission notified the parties of the report on admissibility on May 1, 2016. In
addition, pursuant to Article 37(4) of its Rules of Procedure, the Commission placed itself at the disposal of
the parties with a view to reaching a friendly settlement of the matter and requested the petitioners to submit
any additional observations on merits that they might have within four months. On August 12, 2016, the
petitioners submitted their additional observations on merits which were forwarded to the Argentine State
on August 25, 2016, with the request that it present its additional observations on merits within four months.
1On
October 22, 2004, the lawyer Carlos Federico Bossi Ballester became a co-petitioner in the case.
2IACHR,
3The
Report No. IACHR, Report No. 9/16, Petition 149-02, Admissibility, Eduardo Rico, Argentina, April 13, 2016.
IACHR also declared the petition inadmissible with respect to Articles 11, 21, and 24 of the American Convention.